Juan Perez, director of transportation and land management, said the amendment would clarify that the standard for roads’ ability to handle projected traffic is a target, not a mandate.

It is a question that has come up in court reviews of development projects, Perez said, and developers have asked questions about the implications.

Perez said the measure is not being driven by the desire of a particular developer or county supervisor.

“This is a staff-driven initiative since there have been some questions raised by the courts,” he said.

Riverside County’s general plan says the target for roads associated with developments is “level of service C.”

The document specifies two exceptions where a lower-quality road — and more congestion — is acceptable: at intersections with highways, and in community centers where there is a desire to promote walking and public transportation.

The initiative would give the Board of Supervisors wide latitude throughout the county to approve projects with roads that function at a level less than the target, provided an environmental impact report has been completed. It says the board can balance concerns about congestion against the benefits of projects.

A road’s ability to handle traffic is graded on how it performs during rush hour. The grades range from A, or free flow, to F, which means a road is jammed with stop-and-go traffic.

C is somewhere in the middle. Traffic is flowing but heavy, and minor disruptions trigger major backups.

“You’re not the only car on the road, obviously,” Perez said, in giving his description of level C. “But traffic still flows pretty well and you’re not experiencing long delays.”

Fitts described the existing policy as a check on the power of county officials.

And he said the goal is to make sure the traffic coming out of a new housing tract or shopping center doesn’t overwhelm surrounding neighborhoods.

Fitts characterized the level C target as “kind of a promise from the county to its residents. And now they’re welshing on that promise.”

Perez maintains the county isn’t.

“This particular item (on the agenda) is not changing the level of service target,” Perez said. “That will remain at level of service C.”

The item clarifies that the Board of Supervisors has the authority to allow roads to function at a lower level, only after reviewing all the factors associated with a particular project, he said.

“I think there are appropriate checks and balances in place that will make that the exception, not the rule,” he said. “We don’t think this would open the door to rampant congestion.”

Farah Khorashadi, engineering division manager for the county Transportation Department, added that San Diego, Orange and Los Angeles counties and several Riverside County cities actually have a lower traffic standard: level D.

That doesn’t impress Rick Croy, vice president of the French Valley group Rural Residents and Friends, which also opposes the change.

“A level of service D grade is horrible for a development and means a very low bar for traffic flows in and out of any particular project, be it commercial or residential,” Croy said by email.

Perez said Riverside County has a track record of working hard to prevent congestion.

He cited the Riverside County Integrated Project of early last decade that yielded an updated general plan, highway plan and strategy for saving endangered species habitat. He also cited the county’s aggressive fee on new houses that raises cash for roads.

Fitts said the county indeed has been a model for good planning.

But, Fitts said, “Somehow the county has lost its way.”

The Planning Commission is scheduled to meet at 9 a.m. today in the first-floor auditorium of the County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon St., Riverside.